WWE Debate: Who Is the Better Wrestler, Sting or the Undertaker?

When I started watching professional wrestling back in 1999, I was a WCW fanatic. Back then guys like Hogan, Nash, DDP and Sting—the icon himself—kept me hooked on WCW programming. At the same time, I began watching the WWF. At the time, the Attitude era was in full effect.

The Rock, Triple H, Austin and the Undertaker were some of the most outstanding wrestlers I had ever witnessed. As I began to be more intrigued by both companies, there was a hard-to-ignore similarity in two of their biggest superstars.

Though the Undertaker may have done it a little better, he and Sting both played characters who were seemingly invincible, as if they had come back from the "dead." The gimmicks were outstanding, they had multiple title reigns and were establishing themselves as legends with every match.

As the years progressed and age began to catch up with both of them, I asked myself the perfect question, "Who's better?"

Let's take a moment to look at some of their achievements.

Sting

Two-time NWA World Heavyweight Champion

Two-time TNA World Champion

Six-time WCW Champion

Two-time U.S. Champion

Three-time WCW Tag Team Champion

TNA Tag Team Champion

PWI 500 No. 1 (1992)

The Undertaker

Three-time World Heavyweight Champion

Four-time WWE Champion

Six-time WWE Tag Team Champion

2007 Royal Rumble Winner

PWI 500 No. 2 (2002)

18-0 at Wrestlemania.

I'm split over my own question. So I decided to ask fellow Bleachers. If you decide to comment on this, please include credentials and the reasons why you think one is better than the other. Also, vote on the poll.